> -----Original Message----- > From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 9:42 AM > To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] 2 to 3??
> > If you don't like the GPLv3, you probably didn't > *really* like the GPLv2 and might be more interested > in licensing anything you contribute under something > like MIT/X11/BSD. > > Those licenses allow others to take your code, cripple > it, and sell it to you (perhaps even on a device) for > $100. Oh, and offer you an "upgrade" to (_the same device_ > running) your original code (which still has a few bugs, you > might want a support contract) for $10000. > I can't agree with your statements here. Unless you have no understanding of copyright law, you should realize that YOUR code cannot be crippled regardless of the license that you put it under. The code that YOU write and release under an Open Source or Free Software license will still be available under that license even after someone else uses it in a project of their own. If you use a license that allows for relicensing or closing of the code and someone does so, then it only effects THEIR Version of the code. Yours is still intact, and unharmed. The MIT/BSD/etc licenses have the advantage that a person can if they so desire CHOOSE whether or not they wish to make THEIR code and modifications available. This is a choice. Many of us WILL release our own code even under those terms, but it is a choice to do so. I am not saying that the idea of GPL is wrong. Different developers have different desires for their code. I am simply saying that the Open Source route is just as valid as the Free Software route. As for selling it back to you. It is up to every person to take measures to educate themselves on their purchases. It is the responsibility of the vendor, license or no license to make sure that the information is available for the customer to make an educated decision. As long as both hold up their part of the deal, things go well. Both customers and merchants are just as bad about not doing their part though. Merchants sometimes lie about their products, or simply with hold the truth (which is just as bad). Customers often buy things on Impulse with no real clue what they are buying. If one party to the transaction is taking measures to hold up their side of this implied bargain, then they should be able to expect the other side to as well. Failure to do so often times ends up in the faithful party getting screwed. This happens to venders as well as customers. I will admit however, that in today's economy, it is often the vender who has the upper hand. Beyond that, always thinking in terms of worst case scenerios may be good in war time, but otherwise it will just give you ulcers. ^_^ So, like, pick your favorite license, study what you buy before you buy, and relax a bit. ^_^ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
